Is firefox.en.softmany.com safe?

cautionmedium confidence
52/100

context safety score

A score of 52/100 indicates minor risk signals were detected. The entity may be legitimate but has characteristics that warrant attention.

identity
100
behavior
80
content
17
graph
79

5 threat patterns detected

high

phishing

1 deceptive links where visible host does not match destination host

high

brand impersonation

The site firefox.en.softmany.com impersonates Mozilla Firefox by using Mozilla's official branding, logo, app name, and product descriptions while operating from a third-party domain (softmany.com) unaffiliated with Mozilla. The page title is 'Mozilla Firefox - Download', the app is listed as authored by 'Mozilla Organization', and the structured data references 'http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/new/' as the author URL, falsely implying official Mozilla endorsement. (location: page.html:title, page.html:63-76, page.html:435-438)

high

social engineering

The site presents itself as an official or trusted Firefox download source, using Mozilla branding and a convincing download button linking to https://firefox.en.softmany.com/windows/download. Users are socially engineered into downloading software from an unverified third-party distributor rather than the official Mozilla site. The page also promotes an 'APK for Android' download via a prominently styled green CTA button, further encouraging software downloads from a non-official source. (location: page.html:505-511, page.html:603-604)

medium

phishing

The site mimics the official Mozilla Firefox download page using Mozilla branding, structured metadata, and a download flow hosted on a non-Mozilla domain. Users seeking the legitimate Firefox download could be deceived into downloading potentially modified or malicious installer files from https://firefox.en.softmany.com/windows/download instead of the official https://www.mozilla.org source. (location: page.html:505-511, metadata.json:domain)

low

credential harvesting

A POST form is present submitting to https://firefox.en.softmany.com/rate-content with a CSRF token and hidden fields (content_id, rating). While this appears to be a rating form rather than a credential form, the brin-context flags 1 credential form count. The CSRF token value 'tagOHoJaOu0ciA4XsrO3YED22sfm8wA0VzGQ6MGa' is hardcoded and exposed in both the HTML meta tag and inline JS fetch call, representing a token exposure issue. This form posts user-interaction data (ratings tied to session tokens) to the site's backend. (location: page.html:34, page.html:449-452, page.html:833-840)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/domain/firefox.en.softmany.com

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

Common questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this domain in agent workflows.

Is firefox.en.softmany.com safe for AI agents to use?

firefox.en.softmany.com currently scores 52/100 with a caution verdict and medium confidence. The goal is to protect agents from high-risk context before they act on it. Treat this as a decision signal: higher scores suggest lower observed risk, while lower scores mean you should add review or block this domain.

How should I interpret the score and verdict?

Use the score as a policy threshold: 80–100 is safe, 50–79 is caution, 20–49 is suspicious, and 0–19 is dangerous. Teams often auto-allow safe, require human review for caution/suspicious, and block dangerous.

How does brin compute this domain score?

brin evaluates four dimensions: identity (source trust), behavior (runtime patterns), content (malicious instructions), and graph (relationship risk). Analysis runs in tiers: static signals, deterministic pattern checks, then AI semantic analysis when needed.

What do identity, behavior, content, and graph mean for this domain?

Identity checks source trust, behavior checks unusual runtime patterns, content checks for malicious instructions, and graph checks risky relationships to other entities. Looking at sub-scores helps you understand why an entity passed or failed.

Why does brin scan packages, repos, skills, MCP servers, pages, and commits?

brin performs risk assessments on external context before it reaches an AI agent. It scores that context for threats like prompt injection, hijacking, credential harvesting, and supply chain attacks, so teams can decide whether to block, review, or proceed safely.

Can I rely on a safe verdict as a full security guarantee?

No. A safe verdict means no significant risk signals were detected in this scan. It is not a formal guarantee; assessments are automated and point-in-time, so combine scores with your own controls and periodic re-checks.

When should I re-check before using an entity?

Re-check before high-impact actions such as installs, upgrades, connecting MCP servers, executing remote code, or granting secrets. Use the API in CI or runtime gates so decisions are based on the latest scan.

Learn more in threat detection docs, how scoring works, and the API overview.

Last Scanned

March 26, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Trust Graph

Disclaimer

Assessments are automated and may contain errors. Findings are risk indicators, not confirmed threats. This is a point-in-time assessment; security posture can change.

start scoring agent dependencies.

integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.